Eveliina Tammela

Partner, Member of the Finnish Bar

I assist in demanding dispute and criminal procedures as well as mediation procedures.

I have extensive experience representing clients in civil trials and criminal proceedings.

I assist companies and the company’s management in criminal proceedings such as:

• Trade secret criminal cases and data and communication offences

• Various financial offences

• Environmental offences

• Occupational safety offences and employment offences

• Public and private corruption

• Securities market criminal cases and insider trading

My area of expertise includes corporate criminal liability issues. I assist both defendants and injured parties.

I advise our clients in compliance matters and employment law matters. I also actively provide training relating to criminal law and occupational health and safety matters.

I head our Corporate Crime & Investigations practice at Castrén & Snellman.

Latest references

We successfully acted for the City of Rovaniemi in a matter concerning offence in public office and damages claims in relation to a significant investment decision made by the city. The defendants were the city’s former municipal corporate officer, who was in an employment relationship, and a city treasurer, who was in a public-service employment relationship and acted as the supervisor of the municipal corporate officer. The criminal matter related to the City Board’s decision to invest EUR 2 million of the city’s funds in bonds offered by a newly established investment company in accordance with a decision prepared by the defendants. A significant part of the company’s operations involved quick loan business. The main legal question in the matter was whether the investment of public funds constitutes an exercise of public authority and whether regulation on offences in public office therefore becomes applicable even to a person in an employment relationship. The municipal corporate officer in an employment relationship was charged with aggravated abuse of public office based on her negligence in the preparation and presentation of the investment decision as well as based on a conflict of interest due to the fact that she had invested her own money in a company that received funding from the investment target presented to the City Board. The charges of an offence in public office against the city treasurer concerned his position as the supervisor and reporter of the city’s investment activities. He was also involved in the preparation and presentation of the City Board’s decision. The processing of the matter started in the District Court of Lapland in June 2022. In its judgment given in August 2022, the District Court stated, based among other things on our argumentation, that the investment of public funds constitutes an exercise of public authority and that regulation on offences in public office can therefore be applied to the municipal corporate officer. The District Court deemed that the conduct of the former municipal corporate officer fulfils the characteristics of abuse of public office and that the conduct of the former city treasurer fulfils the characteristics of violation of official duty with respect to the preparation of the investment decision, but the right to bring charges had become time-barred. Punishments could therefore not be imposed on the defendants, but the defendants were ordered to jointly and severally pay the city approximately EUR 114,000 in damages plus interest for late payment. The city treasurer’s share of the amount was 10%. The prosecutor accepted the judgment but the other parties appealed it to the Court of Appeal. Acting for the city, we pursued claims for both punishment and damages in the Court of Appeal. The Rovaniemi Court of Appeal processed the matter in November and December 2023. In its judgment given in June 2024, the Court of Appeal upheld the District Court’s judgment with respect to the abuse of public office and violation of official duty. The Court of Appeal deemed that the municipal corporate officer had failed in her duty to declare the conflict of interest. In addition, she had failed in her duty to ensure that the prepared decision was in compliance with the city’s investment guidelines and that it had been properly put out to tender. The Court of Appeal also found that the text of the investment proposal was insufficient and misleading and that the municipal corporate officer’s conduct was intentional. As regards the city treasurer, the Court of Appeal held that he had failed in his duty to ensure that the investment proposal to the City Board complied with the investment guidelines, that the presentation was not misleading and that risks were taken into account as required by the investment guidelines. With the judgement, the Court of Appeal took a clear position that abuse in public offices and when exercising public authority is not acceptable. The judgment is also significant as it declares that investing public funds constitutes an exercise of public authority and that the liability for acts in office therefore becomes applicable even to persons in employment relationships. In addition, a key question for the Court of Appeal to assess was defining the amount of economic damage in a matter related to investment activities. The Court of Appeal held based on our arguments that the conduct of the municipal corporate officer and the city treasurer had caused damage to the city. The Court of Appeal increased the amount of damages to EUR 210,000 with the city treasurer’s share limited to 10%. The amount was increased because the Court of Appeal deemed that the city had suffered damage not only in terms of the loss of capital but also in terms of the loss of estimated return on investment. The judgement is not final.
Case published 21.8.2024
We assisted a major Finnish industrial company and two employees of its safety organisation in criminal proceedings concerning an occupational safety and health offence. The accident occurred at a common workplace where several other employers were also operating at the time of the incident. During the criminal investigation, the police suspected, among other things, two employees of the company of having committed an occupational safety and health offence. The police also investigated the company’s criminal liability. We examined the safety practices applied in the company and the common workplace, and the roles of the companies and individuals involved in the incident. We justifiably argued that our clients had acted diligently with respect to their duties. The prosecutor concluded that there were no grounds to prosecute our clients, so the prosecutor decided not to press charges against the company and its two employees.
Case published 6.8.2024
We represented a prominent Finnish construction company that was involved in an occupational safety and health offence matter. The company was the project supervisor and main contractor in a joint building site where a workplace accident occurred. The criminal investigation examined the personal criminal liability of the site manager employed by the company and the criminal liability of the company. We investigated and analysed the course of events, the actions of the parties concerned and the company’s occupational safety and health practices. In the final statement we argued that the company and site manager had complied with all occupational safety and health regulations. Based on our arguments, the prosecutor deemed that there were no likely causes to support the suspected offence, decided not to prosecute the employee of the company and waived the corporate fine claim against the company.
Case published 3.6.2024
We successfully advised a Finnish professor in a wide investigation of an offence in public office concerning direct procurement in the social services and healthcare sector. Upon the proposal of the head investigator, the prosecutor decided to discontinue the criminal investigation with respect to our client.
Case published 17.11.2023
We assisted a Finnish industrial company in a criminal investigation concerning an occupational safety and health offence and negligent infliction of bodily injury. Based on the arguments we presented in the final statement, the prosecutor decided not to prosecute the CEO of the company and waived the corporate fine claim against the company.
Case published 16.11.2023
We assisted a Finnish industrial company in an internal investigation related to suspected corruption. We carried out the internal investigation in the matter and advised the client throughout the investigation process. At the end of the investigation process, we drew up the final report with recommendations for actions. In Finland, corruption and bribery crime regulation is being developed to enable intervening in inappropriate actions more effectively. As the regulation becomes more detailed, the number of investigations relating to suspected corruption is expected to grow in Finland. Companies should ensure that their instructions are up-to-date and that an internal investigation will be started as soon as there is a reason to suspect corruption.
Case published 15.11.2023
We successfully acted for Meyer Turku Oy and Meyer Werft GmbH & Co. KG in an extensive criminal case, from the very beginning of the internal investigation to the court’s decision. The case centred around a person having made unauthorised copies of thousands of files containing Meyer-proprietary information and providing consulting services to a competing Chinese shipyard. The District Court handed down its judgement in October 2023, holding that the offender’s actions constituted criminal copyright and trade secret infringement as well as industrial espionage. The court furthermore held that the offender’s actions could be attributed to a limited liability company he had set up. The court ordered the company to pay Meyer EUR 5 million in compensation for the infringement and also awarded Meyer damages for its expenses. The court thus accepted Meyer’s claims in full. The matter is an exceptionally extensive and significant case on criminal trade secret and copyright infringement. Meyer Turku and Meyer Werft are among the largest and most modern shipyards in the world. Luxury cruise ships built by Meyer are internationally known for their cutting-edge technology and innovativeness. Outset In 2018, Meyer received indications that certain Meyer-proprietary files might have been copied from its systems unlawfully. An extensive internal investigation revealed that that a person had copied a significant number of files containing information protected under both copyright and trade secret laws. The offender had also set up a limited liability company and, in the summer of 2018, entered into a service agreement with a Chinese shipyard. Under the agreement, the offender was to provide consulting services relating to new innovation and technology to the Chinese shipyard. The offender and his company also received significant payments from the Chinese shipyard. After the internal investigation, a police report was filed in the late summer of 2018. In addition, the offender’s property was confiscated for security. Criminal charges were filed, and Meyer presented its claims for compensation and damages as a complainant. Results The District Court agreed with Meyer and the prosecution that the offender’s actions met all the elements of criminal copyright and trade secret infringement as well as of industrial espionage. The court held that the offender’s actions constituted infringement of Meyer’s copyrights and its neighbouring database and catalogue rights under the Finnish Copyright Act and that all the elements of criminal trade secret infringement and industrial espionage, as defined in Finnish law, were met. The court also held that the offender’s actions could be attributed to the limited liability company he had set up. The court ordered the company to pay Meyer EUR 5 million in compensation for the copyright and trade secret infringements. The court also awarded Meyer damages and legal costs as claimed. The court thus accepted Meyer’s claims in full. This decision is noteworthy for the protection of the European shipbuilding industry’s know-how in general. The judgement is final.
Case published 18.10.2023
We successfully represented a Finnish wellbeing services organisation in a criminal matter where the defendant was a former employee of the organisation. The employee had fraudulently misrepresented their qualifications, gaining unlawful economic benefit and causing economic loss to the organisation. The employee was sentenced to conditional imprisonment for two separate offences and to pay damages to the organisation.
Case published 15.10.2023

Get to know our other experts in the field